CENTRAL ISLIP, N.Y. (Legal Newsline) - Revlon Consumer Products Corporation is being sued for alleged false advertising of its "DNA Advantage" products in federal court.
Revlon is facing a consumer fraud class action lawsuit that was filed by two women who claimed the company made false and misleading claims regarding the benefits of various beauty products that include a statement that they include "DNA Advantage" in them.
Anne Elkind and Sharon Rosen, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, claim the products are advertised as providing a "DNA Advantage" despite the fact that none of the products can stimulate, interact with or otherwise affect the genetic code in human skin cells, according to a complaint filed April 17 in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York.
Revlon claims in its federal trademark registration that "DNA Advantage" refers to an "ingredient in the manufacturing of cosmetics and makeup to protect against UV rays," which is basically nothing more than sunscreen, according to the suit.
"Revlon's deliberate use of the phrase 'with DNA Advantage,' rather than 'with sunscreen,' is likely to deceive ordinary consumers into thinking that there is something particularly scientifically-important and beneficial about these three cosmetic products, certainly over and above anything having to do with mere protection from UV rays in the form of simple sunscreen," the complaint states.
This deception is especially aggravated by Revlon's concurrent use of the phrase "Age Defying" as part of the overall "Revlon Age Defying with DNA Advantage" brand name, the suit says.
The plaintiffs claim Revlon's packaging of the products features a double-helix design characteristic of the shape of deoxyribonucleic acid or DNA molecules, which could further deceive ordinary consumers.
"Plaintiffs paid more for the products than they otherwise would have absent these statements, and would not have been willing to pay the prices they did, or to purchase them at all, absent the misrepresentations," the complaint states.
The plaintiffs claim Revlon used unfair and deceptive business practices; false advertising; negligent misrepresentation; intentional misrepresentation; violated of the Unfair Competition law; violated the California False Advertising law; violated the California Consumers Legal Remedies Act; breached express and implied warranties; and unjustly enriched itself.
The plaintiffs are seeking for an order declaring the action to be a proper class action; an order enjoining Revlon from selling the Age Defying DNA Advantage products; an order enjoining Revlon from selling Age Defying DNA Advantage products in a false or misleading manner; an order requiring Revlon to engage in a corrective advertising campaign; an order requiring Revlon to pay the nationwide class restitution; and compensatory and punitive damages.
They are being represented by Jack Fitzgerald and Thomas A. Canova of the Law Office of Jack Fitzgerald PC; and Ronald A. Marron of the Law Offices of Ronald A. Marron APLC.
The plaintiffs' attorneys could not be reached for comment.
The case has been assigned to District Judge Arthur D. Spatt.
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York case number: 2:14-cv-02484
From Legal Newsline: Kyla Asbury can be reached at class firstname.lastname@example.org.